LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



llllillllil 

DDDD5D2b4fl1 



<>■ ^^ 



^ 



v^. 











* O M O ' ^-^^ 






.3 



.<^^ 






V6 > 










'* .^^' 












'^^..^ 



^^o ' 



.^" 



^oV 



J^^ ^"o^ '^:W^ ^0 









o V 



-^" 



0^ 



r^ 



'>- o''^ 



>. 






0'' 



vOv-. 



^^- '-' J> ,.^. 



°o 



C 






^^^^ 







SPEECH 



/ 



HON. HANNIBAL HAMLIN, OF MAINE, 



O ON THE PROPOSITION 



TO ADMIT CALIFORNIA AS A STATE ^TO THE UNION. 



DELIVERED 



IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 5, 1850. 



WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 

1850. 



7^ 



|f^' 



ADMISSION OF CALIFORNU AS A STATE. 



Mr. HAMLIN said: 

Mr. President: You and the yenators present 
are fully seiisilile that I have rarely trespassed 
upon ilie patience of the Senate. But for the ex- 
traordinary character of the proceedings of this 
body — but for the unparalleled opposition which 
has been offered, in thi.3 incipient stage, to the ad- 
mission of another sovereijn State into this Union 
— I should have remained silent. But from a 
sense of duty to those citizens who have gone 
from the State, which it is my duty in part here to 
represent, into that distant country, and who have 
gone there lo make it their iiome in future life — a 
duty which I owe to the people who inhabit that 
territory — I should have remained still silent. 
The (juestion before us is on referring the message 
of the President, accom|>anying the constitution of 
California, to its a[)propriate committee. I would 
myself have preferred to have met the discussion 
of this question upon a bill, after it should have 
been reported by a committee. In my opinion, 
such a course would have been more pertinent — 
more appropriate. The Senate, however, have 
deemed it expedient to pursue a dilTerent course. 
The whole merits, upon this question of reference, 
have been open and discussed; and every view 
which could properly pertain to the question of 
the admission of California as a State, has been 
entered into by Senators upon this preliminary 
question of reference to a committee. Under the 
direction which Senators have seen fit to give it, I 
have sought this occasion to give the reasons why 
I shall favor the admission of that State into this 
Union, as one of its sovereign and independent 
States. In this discussion, the whole broad field 
has been opened — slavery in all its forms, the 
question relating to the formation of territorial gov- 
ernments, the question of the boundary of Texas, 
the question of the restoration of fugitive slaves, 
and every other question conceivable, and almost 
inconceivable, connected with them, have been 
permitted to mingle in the discussion of this body. 
Sir, with all these questions, I have nothing to do; 
with all these questions, upon the proposition 
which is now submitted to us, I have nothing to 
say. Let them bide their time; and when they 
shall properly and pertinently come before the 
Senate, then, if I shall deem it expedient, I may 
have something to say upon some of those meas- 
ures. The question of slavery in the territories, 
or slavery in the States, has no connection with 
the admission of California — it should have had 
no connection with it, in my humble judgment, in 



our discussion here. What are, or what are not, 
the boundaries of Texas, has as little to do with 
the question whicli is directly before us. Nor has 
the subject of territorial governments any more 
connection wtth the admission of California than 
these other questions I have named. 

When these questions are legitimately submit- 
ted to us, I shall be ready to act upon them. Let 
the question of slavery in the territories be settled 
according to the spirit of the Constitution, and the 
previous action of the Government, and let us deal 
with Texas, in reducing her boundaries — one of 
these sovereign States — justly; ay, if you please, 
generously ; but let these matters be discussed and 
settled where they appropriately belong; and let 
not the admission of California, as a State, here be 
either retarded in its progress, or finally prevented 
Ijy them. 

The people of California ask no entangling alli- 
ances with these or any other questions. They 
ask the aid of no fortuitous circumstances not di- 
rectly connected with them. They ask not to be 
affected by any circumstances calculated to retard 
or defeat them. Let each question depend upon 
itself, and let each issue be met in its proper and 
appropriate manner. 

I am happy , Mr President, to knov/, that in ex- 
pressing this opinion, it is but a concurrence in 
opinion's which have been expressed by the oldest 
and the ablest Senators upon both sides of this 
chamber. This, then, being the view which I 
take upon this question, I am decidedly in favor 
of the amendment which has been offered by the 
Senator from Missouri, [Mr. Benton,] that this 
question shall be referred to the appropriate com- 
mittee—that it shall there be considered and re- 
ported back, disconnected with any and every other 
subject. When it shall come ba-k, then will be 
the time for us to give our final action, although 
the discussion of the question has been entered 
into in this preliminary stage. Let each stand 
upon its own merits, or fail t'or the wiuit of merit. 
The maxim of Tacitus— prer negoliis, iieque supra— 
is as true now as when it was uttcicd. 

But sir, in passing along, while I have no dis- 
position to connect any suhject wlurh is not prop- 
erly connected with California, 1 may l>e permit- 
ted to make a single remark or two, in relaiton to 
what we have so often witnessed and heard in this 
hall. I allude to that cry of Disunion ! disunion ! 
which has so often resounded in our ears. ."Sir, 1 
have no eulogiums to pronounce upon this UiiK.n 
It furnishes its own best eulogy. The progress 



of art, of science, of literature, and of everything 
that serves to elevate a people; its impress upon 
our arts and our arms; the respect wliich our Hag 
commands in every portion of the habitable globe; 
the busy hum of thrift and enterprise that comes 
up from the marts and market places of twenty 
millions of people, speak a more noble eulos;y than 
I could pronounce, were 1 disjiosed to eulogize it 
here. Sir, all these things pronounce is greatness, 
its glory, and its grandeur. I would rather, sir, 
that my acts as a Senator, and the acts of the peo- 
ple whom I represent, should speak their flevotion 
to that Union which was formed by the wisdom 
of our fathers, and which shall be perpetuated by 
us. 

Sir, there is one other matter to which I wish 
to refer in this connection. I allude to that state 
of alarm which has been created here by Senators 
in speeches of an extraordinary character, or else- 
where by the public press, or by theaid of such stage 
machinery as could be put in motion. Sir, there is 
a method in all this madness. No man can doubt 
the design which it is attempted to accomplish, 
by first alarming the public mind, and producing 
through that alarm those results which are de.?ired. 
I feel that I owe it, sir, to myself, and to those 
who sent me here, to declare that from all the in- 
vestigation which I have been able to bestow upon 
this subject, and from all the evidence which I 
have been able to obtain from everything which I 
can see and hear, this so much talked-of alarm is 
entirely unfounded and factitious. There need be 
no alarm. There is no cause for real alarm; and 
none should be created by unnecessary fear. 
" Fear admitted into public councils btlrays like treason." 
We, in the non-slaveholding States, are deter- 
mined that tiiere shall be no cause for disturbing 
the harmony of the States; and we are equally 
confident that the sound sense and patriotism of 
the people of all the Stales, will determine that 
there shall be no disunion. We once had in 
that section of the Union from which 1 come, a 
class of men who were known to be disunionists. 
Those who shall pattern after their example (and 
there are some) must occupy the same page of his- 
tory which they have occupied. There is no real 
alarm — there is no cause or fear of disunion. I 
have never fell the slightest alarm at any time, 
and I think we can all now see that the bubble has 
burst. This Union will stand as a monument 
of grandeur, and glory, and greatness, long, 
long after every Senator here shall have crum- 
bled into dust. The affections of our people will 
cling to it, and sustain it, in spite of the mad- 
ness of party and of politicians. The true ques- 
tion, then, Mr. President, when separated from 
all these extraneous matters which have been 
forced into this discussion, is, whether another 
star shall be added to our flag — another sister to 
our Union.' We must come to this, the only leal 
question before us; and in considering it, I pro- 
pose to examine — first, the right of the people of 
California to form the constitution which they 
have presented to us; and, secondly, having ihe 
right to form that constitution, have they so exer- 
cised it, that we, in the discharge of our duty, 
should admit thein as another of the States of this 
Confederacy.' The Constitution of the United 
States, in article 4, section 3, declares that 

"New States may be admltlcd by the Congress into this 
Union ; but no new State shall be forni'd or erected vvitliin 



tliR jurisdiction of any otluT Slate, nor any State he formed 
by the junction of two or more Slatfis or parts of States, 
without Iht; coiisrnt of the legislatures of the States con- 
certied, as well as of the Congress." 

Under this clause of the Constitution, the sim- 
ple question of the admission of a State is the one 
which we are to decide. Congress cannot create a 
Stale. It is not within the p)wer or jurisdiction 
of Congress to create a State. In this day, sir, I 
have learned to be surprised at no opinion. It has 
been called the age of progress. So great has 
been thai progress, and so various are the opinions 
which have been expressed, that I have long since 
ceased to be surprised at the expression of any 
opinion. But whoever has examined the debates 
of the Conveiition which formed our Constitution, 
cannot doubt that the question of the formation or 
erection of new Slates by Congress, was one which 
never entered into the minds or thoughts of the 
men who constituted that Convention. The only 
territory then belonging to the Government of 
the United States was that which was covered 
by the ordinance of 1787. That ordinance itself 
provided the mode and manner in which new 
Slates should be erected from it and admitted into 
this Union. The Constitution is silent as to any 
power to create a State. The Convention ihat 
framed the Constitution did not consider any prop- 
osition of that sort. It clearly never entered the 
minds of that body, to insert any provision for 
creating new States. Mr. Madison, in tlie 43d 
number of the Federalist, expressly states, "that 
' the eventual establishinent of new States, seems 
' to have been overlooked by the frainers of that 
' instrument." 

It was only at the last session of Congress, that 
a proposition was made to admit California — the 
whole of California — as one State, and the whole 
matter was referred to the Committee on the Judi- 
ciary. Upon that question, the learned Senator 
from Georgia [Mr. Berrien] made a report, and 
upon this very question — this very power of Con- 
gress to create new States. I read from that re- 
port: 

"The power conferred hy tlie Constitution on Congress is, 
to admit new States, not to create them. According to the 
theory of our Government, the creation of a State is an act 
of popular sovereignty, not of ordinary legislation. It Is by 
the will of the people, of whom the State is composed, as- 
seml)led in convention, that it is created." 

That doctrine, I believe, met with the approba- 
tion of nearly the whole Senate. It certainly is a 
do( trine to which I fully subscribe — it is the doc- 
trine of the Constitution. 

Mr. BERRIEN, (interposing.) Is it the pur- 
pose of the Senator to deduce from that report the 
inference, that it was the opinion of the Judiciary 
Committee that it belonged to the Territories, with- 
out the sanction of Congress, to erect themselves 
into States.' If so, he misunderstands that report. 
The sovereignties, in the view of that committee, 
only become incipient with the authorization of 
Congress to form a Constitution. When that au- 
thorization is obtained, then, and not until then, 
the territory can proceed to act in the erection of a 
State and the formation of a government and con- 
sti'ulion. 

Mr. HAMLIN. I do not think that there was 
any necessity for the honorable Senator from Geor- 
gia to interrupt me. I speak in all kindness. I was 
not speaking of the power of the Territory to 
erect a Territorial or a State government, whether 
authorized to do so by Congress or not, but of 



the power of Congress to create a State govern- 
ment. I quoted the report made by tlie Senator 
from Georgia, for that and for no other purpose; 
but, taking the language of that report, I must be 
permitted to declare, tliat I find in it no such ex- 
planation as that which tiie Senator has just now 
seen fit to give us. It is the undoubted risht of 
the Senator from Georgia to make whatever ex- 
planation he may now deem fit; but the report 
itself nowhere affirms or denies the power of the 
people of the territories to erect themselves into a 
State, without the previous assent of Congress; 
nor does it claim that such assent must be given. 
That belongs to the explanation of the Senator 
from Georgia. 

Mr. BERRIEN. That was not the question 
before the committee. It was, whether an un- 
authorized body could erect a State? 

Mr. HAMLIN. That report has been quoted 
for the purpose I have already stated; but I pro- 
pose to inquire into the very point which the Sen- 
ator from Georgia has suggested in his interrup- 
tion. 

My first proposition is, that Congress has not 
the power to create a State. My second one is, 
that the people of this territory have. Congress 
having failed to make a territorial sovernmenl for 
the people of that territory, it is clearly withm 
the power of the people inhabiting that territory 
to create a State government, as they have done, 
and to present their constitution here, and ask 
to be admitted into this Union as one of the 
sovereign States. They are the persons who are 
to act, not us; they are the persons more directly 
interested, and who have this power. We have 
none. California has acted from right as well as 
from necessity. The people of that territory, I 
hold, have first the right, and, secondly, under 
that right, theie was a necessity for exercising it. 
We have been told, within these halls, that we have 
no power to create a territorial government. That 
is one doctrine. Another is, now, that the people 
of the territory have no power to erect themselves 
into a State. Taking both propositions, and pre- 
senting them to the people of the territory, in 
what manner are they to institute a government, or 
in what manner are they to become a part of this 
Union .' We speak, sir, in just praise of the char- 
acter of our country — its influence upon other 
nations and other peo[ile; but, to my mind, there 
is no one single feature in all our govermiient, or 
in its history, better calculated to spread abroad 
its true character — there is no one incident in the 
whole history of our people, or our government, 
of which we may be more justly proud, than the 
institution of this government in California, 
among a people asseiul)led from every State of 
this Union, virtually without law. And when it 
was declared that the bowie-knife and the revolver 
would be the common law of the land, they, in 
obedienre to the institutions under which they had 
been taught to understand that they were a respon- 
sible part — in obedience to thijse le.-^sons of civil 
government and the rights of man which tliey had 
learned while citizens of the States — they assem- 
bled themselves to<;ether, and from that necessity 
which existed, erected themselves into a State. It 
is one of the finest features of our government. 
No other people upon the face of this glol>e, thus 
brought together, save those who have been edu- 
cated in our States, and who have been made to 



know and feel that they constituted a part of the 
State itself, would have ever thus formed them.- 
selves, as have the people of California, into a 
State. Without that education and training 
which they have received in the various States 
from which they went, it would have been true 
that the revolver and the bowie-knife would have 
been the common law of that land. It is, indeed, 
a sublime spectacle, to witness the order and de- 
portment of that people. It should excite a just 
pride in every breast, and produce a living faith in 
the capacity of man for self-government. 

Now, sir, I hold that the people of that terri- 
tory have, by the law of nature — by that law 
which God gave man — a right to form themselves 
into a government, for the protection of life, lib- 
erty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our Govern- 
ment i.5 based upon that right; its foundations are 
laid deep and broad upon that principle. It was 
in the assertion of that right — the right of the peo- 
ple to self-government — the right to institute a 
government to suit themselves — a government 
which should protect them in their lives, their 
liberty, and their property — it was in the recogni- 
tion of that principle — that the first blood of the 
Revolution fertilized the soil of Lexington. It 
was in recognition of that |irinciple that the Decla- 
ration of 1776 was signed. It was in recognition 
of that very principle that our Government, great, 
and broad, and extensive as it is, was reared; and 
it is by the recognition of that principle thit it is 
at this day sustained. Sir, allow me to read from 
the chart of our liberties, the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence: 

" We hold these truths to be srif evident: that all men are 
created cqiiiil ; thiU Ihey are eiidmved liy their Cnator with 
pcrlaii inalii'natilf rii;hts ; lliatiirno g tiif:se are lil'e, liberty, 
and the pursu t of happiness; that to secure these rights 
Koveriiinonts are instimf d anionf; men, deriving their just 
[lowers Iroiii llie con>enl of the governed ; tlial whenever 
any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, 
It is the right of the people to alter or to abolisli if, and to 
institute a rnnv Government, laying its foundation on such 
prineiples, and organizing its powers in such form, as to 
the in shall seem most likely to eflect their safety and hap- 
piness." 

It is too late in this day to controvert or to deny 
these doctrines. So sti-ongly have these princi- 
ples been cherished in the hearts of our people, 
that in almost every State in this Union, they have 
been incorporated as the fundamental principles of 
the State. The Senator from Alabama, [Mr. 
Clemens,] the other day, if I understood him 
right, controverted and denied these propositions. 
Allow me to read, sir, from the constitution of 
Alabama: 

" All piiliiical po-' eris inherent in the people, and all free 
goveriitnent> are founded on their aiiMi rily, and instituted 
for their benefit ; and therefore they have, at all times, an 
inalienable and iiiderea>ible right to alter, reform, or aholUh 
tlieii form of government, in such manner as tliey may think 
e.xpedient." — ConUitulicn of .ilahama. 

I will also read from the constitutions of Ar- 
kansas and Maine brief extracts: 

" 'lliat all p(iwer is inliereiil in the people, and all free 
governments are founded on their authoiity, and intliluted 
for their pcaee, ^al'cty, and happiness. For llu .idv n enient 
of tli( se ends, Ihey liave, at all limes, an unqualified right 
to ;ilter, ri'turm. or abolish their government, in such man- 
ner as Ihey tliiiik proper."— C'o?is<i/»<<io;t of Jirkansas. 

"All poW( r is inherent ill the people; all free govern 
ments are rounded la tlieir iiulhoiiij , and insiiluted lor their 
benefit. They have, ilier( fore, an inalienable and ii:de- 
fi'aible riL'ht to institute government, and to alter, reform, 
or totally change the same, when their safely and happiness 
require it." — UjnstUution of Maine. 



6 



MassachiisettR.New Hampshire, Vermont, Con- 
necticut, Pennsylvunia, Delaware, Maryland, Vir- 
ginia, North Carolina, Kentncky, Tennessee, 
Ohio, Indiana, Missi.'Jsippi, Illinois, Michio:nn, 
Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa, and other States, ojprm 
the same sovereign and itnlimiled capacity of the 
people to form their constitutions. Now, we are 
told that the people of California, having been de- 
nied by Congress any governinent, have no right 
to erect theniselvf s into a State. The right of the 
people to form a State, in such a case, is a propo- 
sition which I do not see fit to argue. It is a prop- 
osition which I am not disposed to discuss; it is 
too well established, and the arsiument would 
certainly add nothing to, if it did not weaken, the 
proposition. I prefer rather to give authorities 
and precedents. 

But we must not forget that Oregon, the other 
sister territory upon the Pacific slope, proceeded 
precisely in the same coorse, in relation to her 
early organization. She formed, under the right 
which the law of nature and of nature's God gave to 
her, a government, until it was deemed proper and 
expedient for this Government to extend to her a 
territorial organization, and throwing the burden 
of that organization upon the General Govern- 
ment. 

My friend from Iowa [Mr. Dodge] would telF 
you, that in the early settlement of that country, 
precisely similar governments existed, and that 
penalties of death were inflicted by the govern- 
ment which they themselves created, long ere the 
Government of the United States had thrown its 
shield and protection, in the form of a territorial 
government, over that country. It is but the law of 
right, it is but the law of necessity, which compels 
men, when they are thus thrown together, in any 
country without law, to associate themselves to- 
gether for common benefit, for common protection, 
and for commrm defense. Sir, the people of Cnli- 
fornia had that power, and they have exercised it. 
It is the exercise of a right which they properly 
possess; it is but the exercise of that right which 
has been exercised by nearly all the territories 
and all the Slates of this Union. Under the exer- 
cise of that right, they have come here, and pre- 
sented to us their constitution for admissiim. 

But I could go still further. 1 could quote from 
the most eminent statesmen in the land. I could 
quote from the most learned jurists that our 
country ever produced. There is a concurrence 
of opinion of statesmen, of politicians, of jurists, 
upon this point. I can find hnrdly a dissenting 
opinion until this latter day — in this day of prog- 
ress — when a few individuals have attempted to 
contiovert the position, and to detiy the doctrines 
of the Declaration of Independence. With such 
doctrines, sir, I have no sympathy, and in such 
opinion, I have no belief. 

I will quote one single opinion from Justice 
Patterson, one of the justices of the Supreme 
Court of the United Stales : 

" The Con^liUUinn is a fnim of "ovi rniricrit delinoatcd 
l)y Die ini^lity IimiiiI of itie iropip. It is p lanmunt to tlifi 
will of thf Irsisliiliirc, ntift is lial)l(! only to lie revoIit;d or 
altered by those who made it."' 

Now, it was in accordance with this very au- 
thority, in accordance with this very right, that 
the people of California have acted in the forma- 
tion of their government. It is said, I know, 
that there has been Executive interference Now, 



sir, I have no lance to break here in the Senate 
in defence of the Executive. Its champions on 
this floor will be found on the other side of the 
chamber. And while I have no defence to make 
for the Executive, I have no reproaches to cast 
upon it, when it shall have done only its legiti- 
mate duty. As to what is really the true state of 
the case, I believe we are all in doubt. The evi- 
dence whici) has been submitted to us is yet with 
the printer. I have been unable to learn precisely 
the character of the acts of this or of the past Ad- 
ministration ; but so far as I am authorized to 
judge by the declarations of General Riley him- 
self, the inference might well be drawn, that it was 
under ihe direction of the l.\te, as well as the pres- 
ent Administiation, that he s.\w fit to act so far as 
he has acted in the formation of that government. 

Mr. KING, (in his seat.) Not at all. 

Mr. HAMLIN. The Senator from Alabama 
says not at all. I say again, so far as the language 
used by General Riley is concerned, we might be 
justified in drawing the inference, that whatever 
instructions he miglu have received, were received 
under the late, and not the present. Administration. 
I say so, because 1 find this language used in the 
proclamation of General Riley : 

'• The rnelhiiri here indicaed to attain what i? defired hy 
all, viz., a more pcilcct polilical oisaiiization, is deemed 
the must direct and salV that can be adopted, and one fnlly 
authorized hj law. It is the course advised hy the Presi- 
dent, and by' the Secreiarie.« of Slate and of War of the 
United relates, and is calculated to avoi(4 the iniMMiierable 
evils which must necessarily result from any attempt at 
illegal local legislation. It is therefore hoped, that it will 
meet the approbation of the people of Californin, and that 
all good citizens will unite in carrying it into ex cutioii." 

Now, sir, that proclamation was issued by Gen- 
eral Riley upon the 3d day of June, 1849. I learn 
in the correspondence of Thomas Butler King, 
and from other sources, that on his first arrival in 
California, subsequent to the inauguration of the 
present Chief Magistrate, he met this proclama- 
tion by General Riley one day subsequent to that 
upon which it was issued; or, in other words, that 
iMi. T. Butler King was the first individual who 
arrived at California after the inauguration of 
President Taylor; consequently, there could have 
been no such information as that to which General 
Riley could have referred as coming from the pres- 
ent Administration. I am aware that both Mr. 
Buchanan and Mr. Marcy, (late Secretaries of 
Defmrtments,) in this morning's paper, deny clear- 
ly and unqualifiedly that any orders were issued 
under either of these several departments, justify- 
ing the inference which General Riley draws. 
What the orders were which were issued from 
that department, remains for us to see when they 
shall be printed. They are not yet printed. It is 
enough for me to say, that the case stands thus : 
General Riley claims to have drawn from those in- 
structions this authority or these directions. The 
Secretaries, upon the other hand , declare to us that 
no such instructions were issufd. We are bound 
to believe, as I myself most fully believe, that no 
such instructions were issued, as intending to give 
to General Riley power or authority to draw such 
deductions from them as he he has drawn. The 
instructions are in our possession; and when they 
shall have been printed, we slifdl know precisely 
what ihey are. I have already stated that I have 
been unable to learn precisely what they were; but 
it is enough for me to say, that General Riley, if 



he acted under any instructions, acted under some 
other than those of the present Administration. If 
you take his word for it 

Mr. KING. Will the Senator allow me to in- 
terrupt him ? I am sorry to do so, but the tenor 
of his speech would lead me to believe that the late 
Administration, through the Secretary of State, or 
of the War Department, had given such instruc- 
tions to General Riley as authorized him to act as 
he has done. Now, we have in our possession — 
though it is true that the papers have been sent to 
the printer — a letter of the Secretary of State, Mr. 
Buchanan, in which he expressly advises the peo- 
ple of California to remain under the laws then in 
force, to wit, the Mexican laws — to get along as 
well as they can, until Congress shall see fit to 
give them a territorial government. Mr. Marcy's 
instruction is of the same description. 

We have more, sir. General Persifer Smith's 
statement is to this effect, whatever Mr. T. Butler 
King may slate: That the first steamer that ar- 
rived after the adjournment of Congress, brought 
the information that no action had taken place on 
the part of Congress, giving a territorial govern- 
ment; in consequence of which. General Riley 
took the .'Jtep he has. Now, if that was the first 
arrival which took out Mr. King, the statement of 
Gen. Persifer Smith conflicts with that of Thomas 
Butler Kin». 

Mr. DOWNS. If the Senator will pardon me, 
I will state what I understood to be the fact. The 
fact was, I believe, that Mr. King arrived in the 
first steamer sent by order of the Government to 
San Francisco. But before that, a steamer had 
arrived at that place, and it was thnt one which 
took out the first news that Congress had ad- 
journed without action; and, on the reception of 
that news, as I am told by the Senator elect from 
California, General Riley issued his proclama- 
tion. 

Mr. HAMLIN. I have only stated what I re- 
peat again. I made no charge against the late Ad- 
ministration, even if the matter were precisely as 
Mr. Ptiley says he understood it. I only say that 
Mr. Riley has drawn that deduction from the in- 
structions which he received. That is all I need 
say — all that I am justified in saying. That I 
think is clearly evident from the fact, that this proc- 
lamation of Gen. Riley, dated on the 3d of June, 
Was issued at an earlier date than any instruction 
could have reached him from the present Adminis- 
tration. That there were any such instructions, I 
do not pretend to say — I have never said. On the 
other hand, 1 have already stated that we have the 
authority of Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Marcy for 
saying that no such instructions were issued, let 
the instructions be what they may. It was only 
from these instructions that General Riley has 
drawn his deductions. It is for him to answer, 
not for me. Whether he has drawi. them proper- 
ly or improperly, I do not undertake to say. But 
had the late Administration seen fit to have in- 
structed Gen. Riley to aid the people in the forma- 
tion of a Government there, leaving the people to 
act perfectly free, I would not have complained, 
but would have justified it. 

But there is one other point in this matter. Ob- 
jections against the action of the people of the 
territory, are raised upon this side of the chamber 
by another class of individuals, who say, as I un- 
derstand, that there may have been a merely " sug- 



gestive influence" on the part of the present Ad- 
mmistration. Now, whatever may or not have 
been the influence of this Administration, I have 
nothing to say about it. But, granting that it is 
precisely as those who raise the objection state, 
that there has been a " suggestive influence" used 
by the present Administration in relation to the 
formation of this government, and that " suggest- 
ive influence" from this Administration was, that 
the people possessed the power, and that they 
should organize themselves into a government and 
seek admission as a State, who are they that make 
these objections? Sir, they are men who are pre- 
cluded by the record from raising them here. The 
Senatorfrom Wisconsin, [Mr. Walker,] very near 
the last day of the last session of Congress, offered 
an amendment to the appropriation bill, confer- 
ring full and plenary, not to say despotic, power 
upon the President of the United States, author- 
izing him to establish all rules and regulations 
necessary for tlie government of that territory. I 
did not vote for that amendment. I did not be- 
lieve it was justifiable. Those who voted to put 
into the hands of the President full and plenary, 
not to say despotic, power, certainly cannot turn 
round now, and say that the people of California 
are to be kept out of this Union, simply because 
they acted under a merely " suggestive influence" 
of the Executive. Senators who voted, as the 
record shows, for conferring full and plenary pow- 
ers upon the President, authorizing him to adopt 
any rules and regulations necessary for the gov- 
ernment of that territory, I say have no right to 
accuse the E.xecutive of exercising the merely 
"suggestive influence" which he may have ex- 
erted there. They have no right to complain of 
the influence of that suggestion. If the President 
has conducted himself improperly — if he has gone 
beyond the scope and power of the Constitution — 
they may arraign him, and others may defend 
him — I will not. But if I vote to put full powers 
into the hands of any man, and if, subsequently, 
he exercises a suggestive influence, I am the last 
man on earth to complain of that influence, thus 
exercised, although I may complain of the man 
thus exercising it. The thing itself they have no 
right to complain of, though they may complain 
of the President for doing it, and his friends on 
the other side of the chamber may defend him. 

Mr. WALKER, (interposing.) If the Senator 
pleases, I will remark, that it has been so often 
repeated that my amendment gave plenary, if not 
despotic, power to the President, that it is, perhaps, 
necessary for me to say, that the amendment, 
properly read and understood, will not warrant 
such a conclusion. 

Mr. HAMLIN. I will read that port of the 
Senator's amendment on which 1 have been com- 
menting: 

"The Prp.^ident nf tlip Unitfii Plates i* IitpIiv author- 
ized to prHscrilie anil estahlish all proper and neeilfiil rules 
ami resulatioiis (in eonformily vvlili ilie Conslitution of the 
United Stales) lor tlie enforcement of suid laws in said ter- 
ritory, and for the preservation of order and ttanrjuillity, 
and the pstahli:.hment of jnsti'-e tlierpin; and from time to 
time to modify or change tlie said rules and rrsnlalions in 
such manner as may seem to him discreet and proper, and 
to estal>li-h, lemporarily, such divisions, districts, posts, 
ofRcps, ami all arraiigeiiients proper for the pxeciition of 
said laws." 

Mr. WALKER. The Senator will find that 
the Executive is limited to a " conformity with 



8 



the Constitution of the United States, and with 
said laws." 

Mr. HAMLIN. Precisely: I so understand it. 
I did not understand, that the Senator desis^ned to 
travel outside of the provisions of the Constitution; 
but I did understand, that the power which was 
to be conferred upon the President by that amend- 
ment, was to establish such needful rules and reg- 
ulations, in conformity with the Constitution of 
the United Stales, as he should deem fit and proper, 
making him not only the Executive, but Legis- 
lative, power to that Government — giving him 
plenary power, within certain limits, to do just 
what he pleased. 

What were " proper and needful rules and reg- 
ulations?" The President was made the sole 
judge; it was placing a discretionary power in his 
hands, and did authorize him to determine, by his 
own will and judgment, what rules and regula- 
tions should govern that territory. Yet men who 
voted for this, are alarmed at a " suggestive influ- 
ence" now. 

But, sir, in relation to this interference of the 
Executive with the people of (California, I wish to 
say a single word. That there has been any in- 
terference by the Executive of any Administration, 
which would materially change, or in any material 
sense affect, the action of that people, I do not be- 
lieve. They have acted upon their own responsi- 
bility, and in conformity with their rights. I'hey 
have so acted as has pleased themselves, and no other 
power. What is the history of this matter? Some 
time before the proclamation of General Riley was 
issued, the people in their primary meetings, with- 
out even a suggestive influence from any Adminis- 
tration, took preliminary steps fir the organization 
of a government. Subsequently to the organiza- 
tion of these primary meetin2;s, General Riley 
issues his proclamation; and the time fixed by 
General Riley is the very time fixed by the people 
themselves in their own meetings, gotten up in 
opposition, if you please, to the proclamation of 
General Riley, or gotten up without any connection 
with it. Sir, I discard entirely all this talk about 
interference, either directly, indirectly, or suggest- 
ively, of any Administration, in relation to'the peo- 
ple of that territory. They were a people who 
knew their rights. They were a people calculated, 
after knowing and understanding their rights, to 
exercise them, as they have already done, without 
regard to any influence from any quarter. There 
is in my mind, then, not the slightest force or im- 
portance to be attached to this declaration, that 
there has been any interference whatever, either 
directly or suggestively. 

But, it is said, that in the formation of this terri- 
torial government, the people of all classes, climes, 
and complexions were allowed to participate. A 
little examination into that matter, together with 
such information as 1 draw from the Senators and 
Representatives who are here from that country, 
will, I believe, show that this suggestion is totally 
incorrect. A part of the 8th article of the treaty 
is as follows: 

"Mexicans now estalilislud in territories previously be- 
longing to Mt;xico, and which reuiain for the luiure within 
the limits of the United Slates, as defined hy the present 
treaty, shall bu free to continue where ihey .. ow reside, or 
to remove at any time to the Mnxicaii repiililic, retaining llie 
property which they possess in the said territories, or dis- 
posing thereof and removing the proceeds wherever ihey 
please, without their being subjected on this account to any 
contribution, tax, or charije whatever. 



"Those who shall prefer to remain in the said territories, 
may either retain the title and rights of Mexican citizens, or 
acquire those of citizens of llie United Stales. But they 
shall be under the obligation to make their election within 
one year from the date of the exchange of ratifications of 
this treaty ; and those who shall remain in the said territo- 
ries after the expiration of that year, without having de- 
clared their intention to retain the character ot M'Xicana, 
shall be considered to have elected to become citizens of the 
United Stales." 

Now, sir, under the proclamation of General 
Riley, I find that the qualifications of voters were 
thus defined : 

" Every free male citizen of the United States and of 
Upper California, twenty-one years of age, and actually a 
resident in the district, hereafter has, and will be entitled to, 
the right of suffrage; also citizens of Lower California, who 
have been forced 1 1 go to that coiuitry on account of having 
rendered assistance to the American army." 

The qualifications of voters, prescribed in that 
proclamation, are of two classes: first, American 
citizens residing in California; and second, citizens 
of Lower California, who have been forced to go 
to that country on account of having rendered as- 
sistance to the American army. I am told, that 
in consequence of the services which a certain 
pot lion of the Mexicans in Lower California ren- 
dered to our armies in the late war with Mexico, 
some four or five hundred did leave Lower Cali- 
fornia, and establish themselves in Upper Califor- 
nia. Then, sir, there was that class of persons, 
who were not, by the laws of the land, citizens of 
the country. They were not American citizens. 
They did not possess the rights of American citi- 
zens. But those of the Mexicans, who were res- 
idents upon that territory at the ratification of the 
treaty of peace, were American citizens. The 
very terms of the 8th article, to which I have al- 
ready referred, makes them citizens of this coun- 
try. " Every Mexican citizen, residing in that 
territory for the term of one year, is, and shall be, 
considered to have made an election to become a 
citizen of the United States." At the adoption of 
that constitution, more than twelve months had 
elapsed, and every Mexican, so residing in that 
territory of Upper California, was an American 
citizen, and had the same right to vote, that Amer- 
ican citizens had, who had gone there froin the 
States. That class of Mexicans, who had come 
into the territory from Lower California, were, by 
the very article of the constitution, precluded from 
voting on its adoption. It was ratified and con- 
firmed by American citizens only — by those who 
had the right, as American citizens, of voting. 
The final ratification or adoption of this constitu- 
tion, was by the act of American citizens. This 
was the last act in the progress of events. Who 
instituted the first proceedings — what influences 
operated before — is really of no practical import- 
ance. The final act was that of the people them- 
selves. That, at least, is enough for me. 

But, sir, there is a word to say in relation to this 
ri^lit of voting. The right of voting in our ter- 
ritories, in the formation of constitutions, is as 
varied as the right of voting in the Slates. I doubt 
if you can find, in any two territories of the 
United States, that the same rule has been laid 
down as regards the right of elective franchise. 
Who voted in Maine when she become an inde- 
pendent State, and prepared her con.stiiution for 
admission into the Union? Sir, the negrn voted 
there; and was there any objection raised? No, 
sir; he was recognized as an American citizen, 
and voted there then, as he votes there now. It 



was a question with which Congress had no right 
to interfere. It was a question which belonged to 
that sovereign power to determine; and in her 
judgment she saw fit to confer the right of voting 
upon the colored man; and he exercised it then, 
and exercises it to this day. Then, sir, when we 
come to the State of Illinois, we find that foreign- 
ers voted there — that the very law of Congress, 
authorizing the admission of Illinois as one of the 
sovereign States into this Union, made provision, 
that foreigners should vote for the adoption of 
that constitution — in indirect terms, perhaps. It 
prescribed — first, that every American citizen of 
twenty-one years of age, who had resided in that 
territory for six months previous, should have the 
right of voting; and then provided, that every 
other person, that the people of that territory 
should see fit to bestow that right upon, should 
have the right to vote. The people of the territory 
did confer that right upon foreigners then residing 
within her limits, and they did participate in the 
formation of that constitution, and have exer- 
cised the right of elective franchise under that 
constitution until within about two years. We 
come to Michigan; and what do we find there? 
Michigan is a State which formed her consti- 
tution without the consent of Congress pre- 
viously given. 1 find in her constitution a pro- 
vision, securing to foreigners the right to vote; 
and when she come here with her constitution, 
asking admission of Congress into this Union, 
by an express provision in her constitution, the 
foreigner in that State had the right of voting. 
Why, sir, the rights of the people in these terri- 
tories, in relation to the elective franchise, have 
been as varied as the rights in the States; and this is 
the first time that I ever heard an oljjection raised 
in the Senate, or in Congress, or an attempted in- 
terference, as to who should possess that right in 
the territories, when they framed their constitu- 
tions, or when they exercised the powers granted 
to them under a territorial government by Con- 
gress. But suppose that foreigners were allowed, 
in the incipient stages, to vote upon the adoption 
of a constitution. The authorities to which I 
have alluded, I think, will satisfy every Senator, 
that it is a question which has never before been 
raised — it is one which we cannot control: the 
people of the teriitories themselves must de- 
termine this question, and not us. 

There is another class of authorities, to which 
I beg leave to call the attention of the Senate: it is 
to those States which liave been admitted into this 
Union. Now, sir, of all the States which have 
been admitted into this Union, nine Iiave been ad- 
mitted ivltkout any previous assent of Congress to 
form a constitution, and eight with it. The rule is 
in favor of admitting States without the previous 
consent, and not in accordance with a previous 
act. It is true, that in these various States I find ' 
a difference. They are of several classes, dif- , 
fering somewhat, and hardly any two coming ; 
within precisely the same rules. But I assert, j 
and I have the authorities here by me, that nine I 
of the seventeen States that have been admitted [ 
into this Union, have been admitted without any 
previous autlim-ity having been given on the part 
of Congress for llie people thereof to form consti- 
tutions, and to erect themselves into a Slate, for 
admission into the Union. The rule, then, is 
against that assent. The Senator from Alabama 



[Mr. Clemens] was pleased to rely — somewhat, 
as I thought, with an air of triumph — upon the 
acts of this body in regard to the adniis.sion of 
I Tennessee as one of the States of this Union. 
Vermont, Kentucky, Tennessee, Maine, Arkan- 
sas, Michigan, Florida, Texas, and Iowa, were 
admitted without any previous act of Congress 
authorizing them to form a constitution; and Ohio, 
Louisiana, Indiana, Mississippi, Illinois, Ala- 
bama, Missouri, and Wisconsin, with a previous 
act — making nine without an act, and eight with 
a previous act. 

There are some features in relation to these States 
to which I beg leave to call the attention of the Sen- 
ate. First, that of Vermont. Senators will not for- 
get that, under the clause of the Constitution which 
I have already read, new Stales may be admitted 
into the Union, but no new States shall be carved 
out of old States, or be made by the junction of two 
or more States, without the consent of the Legisla- 
tures thereof, and of Congress. The poir.t I raise 
is, that if sufficient reasons exist for a prior act of 
Congress for the admission of a State into this 
Union, it applies with just as much force to a 
State coming, as Vermont, Kentucky, and Maine 
come, as to any of the other States, out of a terri- 
tory. There was just the same necessity for a 
prior assent of Congress, in relation to the forma- 
tion of a State out of an e.tisting State, as there 
was for the making of a constitution by the people 
of a territory. I cannot see any real dilTerence. 
There is none — there can be none. Then, in the 
early action of the Government, we find that Ver- 
mont, which was in fact an independent State, 
during the Revolutionary war, although exercising 
a jurisdiction conflicting somewhat with that of 
New York, presented herself here in '91, and was 
admitted as one of the States of this Union — New 
York assenting simply for the purpose of quieting 
the conflicting jurisdiction that existed between 
the two States. Her constiution was never pre- 
sented to tiiis body for its consideration. 

Kentucky was the next State admitted into this 
Union. She was formed of a part of Virginia — 
the Legislature of that Stale giving its consent. 
Virginia gave her consent December 18, 1789. An 
act passed Congress February 4, 1791, for the ad- 
mission of Kentucky as a State into the Union, to 
take effect on the first day of June, 179i2. When 
Kentucky applied for admission, she iiad not even 
formed a constitution at all; nor had she done any- 
thing of the kind when the act passed admitting 
her. But before that act took effect, she did meet 
in a convention of her people and form a constitu- 
tion; but that was never presented to Congress. 
There was no consent either asked by Kentucky 
or given by Congress, for the formation of a con- 
stitution in Kentucky. Oflicially, Congress in- 
deed never knew whether Kentucky had a consti- 
tution or not. This is the history of the admission 
of Kentucky. 

Now, sir, comes the next in order, Tennessee; 
and to that case I beg leave to call the particular 
attention of the Senate, because it is, as I think, 
perfectly parallel in its bearings to that of Califor- 
nia I confess that I was much surprised at the 
remarks which fell from the Senator from South 
Carolina [Mr. Calhoun] yesterday. He tells U3 
that Tennessee, upon presenting herself here, was 
remanded back to her territorial condition. Let 
me tell the Senator that he is mistaken; that he has 



10 



not looked closely at the authority upon which he 
has relied, and upon which he asks us to reject 
that sister State upon the Pacific. After enumer- 
ating our duties, and after alluding to the case of 
Tennessee, as one parallel in its character, the Sen- 
ator from South Carolina tells us that we should pur- 
sue the course now which Congress pursued then. 
In that conclusion I concur. But the course which 
Congress did pursue then, is not the one which 
was indicated by the Senator from South Caro- 
lina. No, sir. Tennessee was ceded to the United 
States by North Carolina; and in that deed of ces- 
sion, there was contained an express provision that 
it should be admitted into this Union as one or 
more States, as Congress should determine, when 
there should be sixty thousand inhabitants within 
the territory; and a territorial government was 
formed in 1790 for the territory, by Congress. In 
1796 there was the requisite number, and a cen- 
sus was taken by the people of that territory, and 
it was found that its population exceeded the 
number specified in the deed of cession by North 
Carolina. She come here with her constitution 
formed, and which defined her limits as including 
the whole of that territory, which might be ad- 
mitted as two States, if Congress should so deter- 
mine. 

Who settled that question.' The people in that 
territory settled it. Who formed their constitu- 
tion .' They formed it without any prior consent, 
or without asking the prior consent of Congress. 
Who fixed the boundaries' The people of that 
territory fixfil their l)oundarirs. And I agree with 
the Senator from South Carolina, [Mr. Calhoun,] 
that the action of Congress now, should be what it 
was then. What was that action .' I take issue 
with the Senator. He is wrong in his historical 
facts. I find, sir— but I will not trouble the Sen- 
ate by reading: I have it here — I find that that 
constitution, upon the 8th of May, 1796, was pre- 
sented to the Senate in a manner precisely as this 
has been presented, accompanied by a message 
of the then President of the United States. It had 
been formed, and all the transactions attending it 
have been as I have narrated. It come here. It 
was referred to a committee of this Senate. That 
committee reported. That report in substance — ^^I 
will not cite it at length — did lay down the posi- 
tion, that, inasmuch as there had been no census 
taken of the people of that territory by the United 
States, and inasmuch as Congress had not deter- 
mined whether there should be one or more States 
— that report did come to the conclusion that 
the proceedings of the territory were informal, and 
that she should be remanded back to her territorial 
condition. After a debate in this body, that re- 
port was accepted upon a vote of eleven to thirteen. 
A bill in accordance with that report vvas pre- 
sented, and passed — no division. It went to the 
House. The House took that bill, amended it 
by striking out all after the enacting clause, and 
inserting two sections, admitting Tennessee as 
one of the Slates of this Union. That come back 
to the Senate. The Senate insisted upon their 
former vote. Conferees were appointed, and, in 
accordance with their report, the Senate receded 
from their former vote — thus admitting Tennessee, 
the first session she applied, and never rernanding 
her back to her territorial condition — never send- 
ing her back, but aflirming her acts after she had 
thus embraced, within her own limits as one State, 



all that territory which Congress had a right to 
erect into two. She defined her own boundaries, 
and took her own census. 

Iowa formed her constitution November, 4, 
1844, describing and defining her boundaries. 
Under this constitution, on her application for ad- 
mission,' Congress passed a law, admitting Iowa 
with different boundaries. This act was abso- 
lutely refused by Iowa, and she was thrown back 
into her territorial form of government. 

On the 18th of May, 1846, Iowa formed another 
constitution, again describing and defining her 
boundaries. August 4, 1846, Congress passed an 
act, defining the boundaries of Iowa, and taking 
the same boundaries named in the constitution of 
Iowa. December 28, 1846, she was admitted as 
a State. 

It will be seen that Iowa thus erected her State 
without the assent of Congress, defined her own 
limits, and took such a part of the Territory of 
Iowa as she chose, leaving what she did not see fit 
to include in the State. 

Sir, there are facts in relation to the other 
States, which would be pertinent, and would show 
a great analogy between California and them. 
But, as I have already enumerated a number 
of States which have come in, without the au- 
thority of Congress, to form a constitution, I will 
leave it there, with a single remark in relation to 
Texas. 1 include that in the number. There was 
a prior assent of Congress that she should be in- 
corporated within this Union. She was a foreign 
State. But the question which is now put in issue 
— the question which we are called upon to de- 
cide — is, whether the people of this territory have 
the natural, inherent right, and, having that right, 
whether it was their duty, to exercise that power 
of forming a constitution.' So far, then, as the ad- 
mission of Texas was concerned, it certainly has 
that analogy to this case. But while we gave an 
assent to her admission prior thereto, there was no 
assent to the formation of her constitution, leav- 
ing that to the people, and without our interfer- 
ence, precisely in the same.way that it was left in 
the territories. There is another view in this con- 
nection. The people, I hold, in California have 
higher claims upon us; and we are bound to recog- 
nize their acts with warmer commendation than 
we should the acts of those who have exercised 
the power of forming a constitution under a terri- 
torial government. Under a territorial govern- 
ment, there is a recognition of the power of the 
General Government, to give them the form at least 
of a territorial government, acting under that govern- 
ment which comes from the United States — acting 
under the authority which has been given to them 
by the General Government. There is a greater 
assumption of power upon those thus acting under 
a territorial government, if there could be an as- 
sumption of power anywhere. There is a greater 
assurnption of power by persons acting under a 
previous territorial government, than there is in 
the people who have acted in California. In the 
territories to which I have alluded, they have a 
complete government, which protects them in all 
their risihts, which secures to them liberty, and 
guarantees to them protection in everything which 
they enjoy. Not .so in California. Coldly and 
cruelly— I had almost said, wickedly— you have 
refused to her any government at all; and then, 
after having thus neglected to furnish her any 



11 



government, you turn round and deny to her 
the authority to create a State for herself. If the 
people of a territory come to Congress, and 
ask for our bounties and our protection under 
a territorial soverrment, which is a mere ap- 
pendage to this Union, and whicii, as such, is 
sunnoiled, and protected, anfl guarded, and fos- 
tered by the Government, they woiild have less 
necessity for forming a State for themselves, than 
the peofilc of California have; yet in such cases, 
their acts and their right to act have been fully 
recognized, as we have seen. 

Mr. TURNEY, (interposing.) I sl)ould like 
to inquire whether the Senator was not in favor 
of no territorial government for this territory at 
the last Conaress? I would inquire whether he 
has voted for any bill proposing such a govern- 
ment, or whether the gentleman himself did not 
uniformly vote against any bill giving her such a 
territorial e-overnment? 

Mr. HAMLIN. I recollect, Mr. President, 
what the Senator refers to. I do not design to be 
drawn from the thread of mv argument here, but 
I will answer, briefly, that I recollect very well 
how i voted upon a motion submitted by the hon- 
orable Senator from Illinois. The motion was 
made by that Senator [Mr. Douglas] that the 
Senate proceed to the consideration of the bill 
giving a territorial government to California, 
at the last session. For that motion I voted 
with great cheerfulness — 1 refer to the bill that 
had passed the House. For that bill I should 
have voteil. I tbink the Senator from Tenne.ssee 
[Mr. Turnky] was found voting in the negative, 
thus prevtnlivg the Senate frmn acting on that bill. 
Another thing: I have voted on all occasions for 
governments to those territories — .such eovern- 
ments as I believed the people of those territories 
themselves wanted, and such as I believed were 
right. It is true, the Senator from Tennessee and 
myself have not always agreed in our opinions 
as to what bills were best adapted to the terri- 
tories 

Mr. TURNEY. I would ask of the Senator 
whether he voted for the Clayton bill, which 
neither admitted nor excluded slavery in the 
establishment of a territorial government for Cali- 
fornia, but left it to the judiciary.' 

Mr. HAMLIN I did no such thing. I did 
not vote for the Clayton bill. I regarded it as no 
compromise of the question at all, but as a cun- 
ning device to spread slavery in that territory. 
And for such a bill the Senator from Tennessee 
knew well that I never would vote. Such was my 
opini')n of that bill. Other Senators, I am aware, 
entertained a different opinion. I think that bill did 
not Irave it lo the judiciary even. There was no way 
by wliich lo reach the judiciary provided in the bill. 
If there had been, it would have been perfectly 
nugatory. That proposition was most admirably 
ridiculed in the speech of the Senator from Ohio, 
duriiii,' the last Congress, now in my eye, [Mr. 
CoRwiv] He asked whether the slave would 
have power to come on here from California to 
protect hiniself by an appeal to the Supreme 
Court.' The idea was so ]ireposterous, that I sup- 
posed it was admitted on all luinds, that that bill 
contained no such provision as would give to the 
slave any practical rights in the Supreme Court. 

Mr. BUTLER, (in his scat.) This was a bill 
to make a Stale, for which the Senator voted. 



Mr. HAMLIN. No, sir; it was not to make a 
State. It was a territorial bill — the tcrriliuial bill 
which come from the House, with the ordinance of 
1787 in it. That is the very bill. That is all the 
diflference between meum and tuum. 

Sir, in this connection, and as affecting the peo- 
ple of Calif<irnia, I have another authority, to 
which I beg leave to call the attention of the Sen- 
ate. It is an extract which I make from the 
" Union," a newsp.iper published in this place, of 
February 4, 1849, a little more than one year since: 

"TlieSnuth fleiiies tliat Congress lias ;iiiy jurisdiction 
over the siihjecl of slavery, and contends that Hi" pcojile of 
the trrritorics nloitc, when they frame a cnnsliiiiunii, pre- 
paratory to admission into tlie Union, liave ari«l'l to speak 
iLiid he lieurd on that matter. This fact being settled, it 
really seems to us that this exciting qiirsiion miglit he 
speedily adjnsted, if calm counsels prevail. The South 
contends for her honor, and for tlie great principles of iion- 
iiitervenlion and Slate equality. Why, thin, cannot all 
unite, .and petinit California to come into (he Union as soon 
as ilic cm form a constitution 1" 

Now, sir, what was the ijifluence which such 
an article, published in the official ors^an of the 
Government, was calculated not only to have 
upon the people of that country, liut upon the 
people who should go there? Why, sir, it was 
recognizing, in all its length and breaiitli, the power 
for which I contend — the power to fiu-in a State as 
she shall see fit. Now, sir, the influence of that 
press must have been felt even upon the Pacific 
coast, laying down the doctrine, that the people 
had a ri^ht to form that government — nay, £oing 
as far as the people have gone — that tliey had a 
right to admit or reject the institution of slavery, 
as they should see fit. Let me ask now, in the 
language of the " Union," why all thisexcitement 
cannot subside, and why cannnt all unite and per- 
mit California to come into this Union ? Why, sir, 
whatever may be my opinions in relation to the 
powers or the duties of this Government over the 
territories, I have a right to insist, that those who 
promuli!;ated such doctrines, are bound by the acts 
of that" people, having been instrumental in in- 
ducing them to perform these very acts. 

But, sir, let me read another extract from the 
last annual message of the late Executive, Presi- 
dent Polk, and see what was the language then 
held upon this question, whether Ciuigress shall 
legislate or not: 

Extract from the Annual Messn^eof President Polk, Decem- 
ber 5. \MS. 

" Whether Congress shall li sislate or not, the people of 
the acquired lerrimries, when a-semhled in convention to 
form Slate con>tiIut oiis, will pussi-ss Ihe solo and exelusive 
power to determine for thems. Ives whether slavery shall, or 
shall not, exist within their limits. If Coi, cress shall ab- 
stain frominterleruig with the question, the people of these 
territories will he lelt tree to adjust it as lli.y may think 
proper, wlien Ihey apply for adnnssion as States into the 
Union." 

Here is clear and certain authority for the people 
to do just what they have done— exclude slavery 
from the State. And yet who doubis that she is, 
in fact, opposed in her admission, for having done 
that very thing.' Was not this an inducement for 
the people thus to act.' and, followed up by its 
official organ, recognizing the doctrine of the right 
of the people thus to act, inducing them by this 
very course thus to act, are we to turn round now, 
and coldly say that they are to be remanded 
Ijai-lf — not to a territorial goveinment, for they 
had none — but back to a qiirm civil government, 
or where what is precisely the law none seem to 
know.' And, sir, 1 have another extract to read. 



12 



It is from a speech delivered by the Senator from 
South Carolina [Mr. Calhoun] in February, 1849. 
It says: 

" Sir, [said he] I hold it to be a fiinriamenfal principle of 
our political syslKin, that the people have a right to establish 
what gove nineiit they may think proper for themselves ; 
that every Slate, about to become a meuiber of this Union, 
has a riyhl to form its own government as it pleases; and 
that, in order to be admitted, there is but one qualification, 
and that is, that the government shall be republican. There 
is no expres< provision to that etlect, but it results from that 
Important section vvhiL'h guarantees to every State in this 
Union a republican form of government." 

Now, .sir, even the Senator froin South Carolina, 
one year .since, standing; here as an exponent of 
the institutions of the South, then laised his voice, 
encouraging the people to go there — people to 
whom we had furnished no government — encour- 
aging them to perform the very acts which they 
have now performed. What may be his opinion 
upon the right of the people to form a constitution, 
I do not know; but I iiold, that the people in Cali- 
fornia might well claim to act under such opinions 
as are here expressed. 

Sir, I could quote from now until the sun goes 
down — I could quote until it rises to-morrow 
morning — from statesmen, orators, and news- 
papers of the South, recognizing the very doctrine 
that they were willing to leave this question to 
the people of the territory. After having thus 
encouraged them to perform the very act, which 
was admitted as legitimate and proper for them to 
do, it is too late in the day, after this, Senators, to 
attempt to resist the admission of California, for 
no other or better reason, than that she has not 
acted in cot)farmity with a prior act of Congress. 
There must be an assent of Congress, it is tiue; 
and in this connection I beg leave to say, that it is 
far better in all cases that there should be a prior 
application to Congress, that no questions of 
boundaries, that no other questions tending to 
produce conflict, may arise, when she comes to 
ask her final admission. It would be vastly better 
that there should be, in all cases, a preliminary step 
taken by Congress. But as California has seen 
fit to adopt for herself a constitution without this 
preliminary act, why, every man knows that when 
we do admit her, that is the assent of Congress, 
as broad , as clear, as positive, as if it had preceded 
it. Here I leave the question of the right of the 
people to form a constitution, without the consent 
of Congress. 

Having the right to form a constitution, has that 
right been so exercised that she should be admit- 
ted as a State.' The first objection raised is one 
relating to her boundaries. The Senator from 
South Carolina, [Mr. Butler,] now before me, 
upon this, speaks with much emphasis. This 
question of boundary is one of im])ortance; it is 
one in which the governments interested are to be 
consulted. I concur in all the importance of the 
boundaries of a State — in all the importance which 
the honorable Senator from South Carolina [Mr. 
Butler] attaclies to them. I hold it is just as 
competent for us to give our assent to the bound- 
aries now, as it would have been to have given 
our consent at the outset. 1 know the tenacity 
with which individuals, as well as nations, adhere 
to monuments. We all know that god Ttrminus 
has been an obstinate god, from the very creation. 
He might as well be called, and for aught I know 
is, the legitimate offspring of Mars. The obsti- 



nacy with which individuals, as well as nations, 
have adhered to their boundaries, has been the 
cause of the shedding of more blood than any 
other, save that of religion, in the history of the 
world. Of all wars that have deluged the earth, 
more blood has been shed in the defense of the 
boundaries of nations, than for any other cause, 
save that to which I have alluiled. 

Sir, the fable of the Carthagenian, Philrenii, is 
not without its instructive lessons. Where they 
fell, monuments were erected to their memory; 
and there was the boundary of Carthage. Now, 
sir, the argument 1 deduce from all this is, if there 
is so rTiucli importance to be attached to bounda- 
ries of nations, then we should give our assent to 
the admission of California, and not circumscribe 
her because she may not have fixed precisely the 
limits that might have been preferred by some of 
us. To prevent that very conflict which might 
arise from changing the boundaries, is the very 
reason, of all others, why we should accept her as 
she is. 

But, sir, what are her boundaries ? It is true 
that she contains tVom one hundred and forty to one 
hundred and fif y thousand square miles. She is 
bounded upon the north by Oregon — I suppose 
no Senator will change the limits of that terri- 
tory: she is bounded upon the east by the Great 
Desert; she is bounded upon the south by Mexico, 
and upon the southeast by a desert. Now, sir, 
looking at the description of that country, there 
would, in the o|)inion of some, be a better bound- 
ary, to take the crest of the Sierra Nevada for 
her eastern boundary; but from the information 
which has been imparted to me by Senators and 
Representatives of that State, \ leain, that upon 
the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada, there is 
a long belt of land, varying from ten to thirty 
miles in breadth, which can be attached to no 
other State in that section, and it is valueless, en- 
tirely, unless connected with California. Whether 
it will be valuable there, time alone can deter- 
mine. For grazing and for agricultural purposes, 
it may have some slight value; but as a mere belt 
of land lying west of, and bordering, that desert, 
it could be incorporated into no other State in this 
Union, save the State of California, where it is 
to be incorporated. Yes, sir, the very construc- 
tion of that country renders it so homogeneous, 
while it is so large that it should retain its present 
boundaries. Look at its situation. Here is the 
Sacramento rising in the north, and the San Joaquin 
rising in the south, coming to a common centre, 
and finding their outlet upon the Pacific. You may 
erect new Slates upon the slope of that country, and 
if you choose, you may dot it over with Stales no 
larger than Delaware and Rhode Island. But 
every man knows, from the homogeneous char- 
acter of the country, that while the San Joaquin 
must run north, and the Sacramtnlorun south, its 
commerce, its products, its wealth, its everything, 
must float down those rivers to a common centre. 
You may as well speak of preventing the produc- 
tions of the mishty West from going down to 
New Orleans. You may as well attempt to divert 
them by your artificial communications overland; 
while the Mississippi shall run to New Orleans, 
that de| 6t must be the one where all the commerce 
west will go. So in relation to this State of Califor- 
nia: it is homogeneous; the comni.^rce of the 
country, and everything connected with it, must 



13 



find its outlet upon the coast of the Pacific, at the 
port of San Francisco; and what matters it so far 
as we may be concerned, whether that river shall 
water one or more States? The people of that 
country will be bound together by a common inter- 
est, and should be embraced in one State. 

But, sir, it is said, because slie possesses an 
area of one hundred and forty, or one hundred and 
fifty, thousand square miles, that we are not to re- 
ceive her at this time as a State of this Union. 

I think, Mr. President, neither you nor I, nor 
any other Senator, heard thesesiartlins; complaints, 
when our sister Texas come m as one of the States 
of this Union. There was nothing to startle or 
alarm the public mind then. Texas with her 
three hundred and twenty-five thousand square 
miles, was not rejected because she was too large 
a Stale. No attempt was made to keep her out of 
the folds of this Union, because she possessed an 
area about five times as large as our largest State. 
No complaints or objections then of this sort were 
made. Now, sir, taking the bill of the Senator 
from Missouri, [Mr. Benton] — I think that cir- 
cumscribes Texas within the smallest limits — 
takinj^that bill, and reducingthe territory ofTexas, 
with her consent, to the limits which that bill 
proposes, you will find that Texas still remains 
with one hundred and fifty thousand square miles, 
and is larger than California with a territory 
that has the capacity to sustain a population 
ten times as large as that of California. And 
where is the alarm at the bill offered by the senator 
from Missouri, [Mr. Benton.'] Where is the 
alarm that it does not reduce I'exas down to a 
proper hmit.' But it may be said, that there is con- 
tained in that bill, as there was in the orginal 
articles of annexation, a provision that she may 
be divided. Granted, sir. You have no more 
jurisdiction over her than if she were not admitted 
with that provision. We might, if we please, put 
it in the bill admitting California. She may be 
divided at some subsequent period, with her con- 
sent. That gives us no greater power to make a 
division at some subsequent lime, than if such a 
provision were not contained in it. It would be a 
matter of agreement between the government of 
the United States, and the people of that State, 
whether she should be severed or not — whether 
the piovision contained in her act of admission 
should be carried out or not : she holds the power 
within her own hands. So long as Texas shall 
insist that she will not be reduced, it is not within 
our power to touch her. Whenever she shall grant 
that assent, it may be done. So with California; 
if, at any subsequent period of time, it should be 
deemed expedient or proper to circumscribe her in 
her limits, with the assent of the people of that 
State, it can be done. Without her consent, it 
could not be done. 

Again: judging from the information we can 
gather from that country, there cannot be a single 
doubt, that the capaciiy of Illinois, the capacity of 
Indiana, fif Pennsylvania, or Ohio, or any of our 
first-class agricultural States, is vastly greater to 
sustain a population, than the territory embraced 
within the limits of California. One of those best 
acquainted w th the matter has asserted that there 
is more arable land in the State of Massachusetts, 
small as she is, than is to be found within the 
whole limits of California. However that may 
be, it is beyond a doubt, that one of our first-class 



States contains the elements of a vastly greater 
population, and possesses a vastly greater number 
of acres of arable land. Then, sir, taking her ho- 
mogeneous character, taking the quality of her 
soil, we can have, I apprehend, no doubt upon our 
minds, that we shall not only be justified in admit- 
ting, but that we are imperiously called upon by 
every principle of reason and justice to admit Cali- 
fornia, as one of our sister States, in this Republic. 

But it is said that no census has been taken of 
her population, and therefore she should be re- 
manded back to her original condition. Who 
heard these arguments, of perfect equality in pop- 
ulation, so eloquently enforced by the honorable 
Senator from Alabama, [Mr. Clemens,] when 
Florida came here asking for admission.' The 
honorable Senator from Alabama was not here 
then to raise his voice against the admission of 
Florida, because she did not present a perfect 
equality in population ; or, in oth^r words, be- 
cause she did not, to a certainty, possess a popu- 
lation which would entitle her to one Representa- 
tive in the popular branch of Congress. Now, we 
find that, of all colors and complexions, in 1840, 
she had only fifty-four thousand, while more than 
seventy thousand inhabitants were needed as the 
basis for one Representative. Deducting two-fifths, 
not representable, of t'le colored population, and 
she had only about forty thousand. Was there 
any individual then alarmed, lest the compromises 
of the Constitution would be trodden down, if 
Florida come in with her population thus limited .' 
This was her population in 1840. Allowing her 
for a progressive increase, and she could not have 
had fifty thousand at the time of her admission. 

When Texas came in, no provision was made 
to ascertain, by act of Congress, her population, 
for the purpose of coming down to that rule of 
perfect equality which was so forcibly illustrated 
by the honorable Senator from Alabama, [Mr. 
Clemens.] 

Well, how was it in relation to Texas? Was 
there any particular alarm in relation to that ter- 
ritory, lest it should not have a population large 
enough to entitle it to an admission into this Union? 
Was there any fear that the compromises of the 
Constitution were to be broken down, and that 
she was to be remanded back to her independent 
position until a census should be taken? No. 
There never had been a census taken, at any pre- 
vious time to that when she came and knocked 
at the door for admission into this Union; and the 
honorable Senator from Texas [Mr. Rusk] told 
us the other day, in his place here, that they had 
a population less than thirty thousand with which 
to achieve their independence. 

Well, sir, she had a population, in fact, slightly 
beyond that which would have entitled her to one 
representative. The honorable Senator from Texas 
himself remarked to me, in answer to an inter- 
rogatory, that she probably had about eighty thou- 
sand. California, from information upon which 
reliance can well be placed, has a population from 
110,000 to 120,000 inhabitants, and is increasing 
with astonishing rapidity. 

There is, in the 9th article of the treaty of peace 
with Mexico, a stipulation that the territories 
ceded to our Government shall be incorporated 
into the union of the United States. There should 
be no obligation of a nation more sacred, or more 
faithfully complied with, than that which is con- 



14 



tained in its treaties with other governments. Our 
treaty with Mexico imposes upon us an obligation 
which we cannot disregard at this time, unless we 
mean to be faithless to our treaty stipulations. 
Here is the article to which 1 refer: 

" Art. 9. Tlie Mexicans, vvliii, in tlie Territories afore 
said, ^^llall itni preserve ttie fliiiracter ofoltizi-'iis nt'tlie Mex- 
ican repulilie, coiiliirnialiiy with what is stipulaled in the 
preceding ariicic, j^hall b^ incorporated into tlie Union of 
tlie United States, and be admitted at the proper time (to 
be judged (if by the Congress of llie United States) to tiie 
enjoyment of all the rights of citizens of the United Stales, 
according to the principles of the Constitution ; and in ttie 
mean lime, shall be niaiitaiiied and protected in the free 
enjoyment of their liberty and property, and secured in the 
free exercise of their religion, without restriction." 

Now, such IVIexicans as remained in the terri- 
tory for twelve months after the ratification of the 
treaty of peace with Mexico, became tliereby 
American citizens. Under the 9th article, it is 
expressly stipulated that they shall be incorporated 
into the Union of the United States, and be admit- 
ted at tlie proper time (to be judged of by the 
Congress of the United States) to tlie enjoyment 
of all the rights of citizens of the United States. 
Taking the existing slate of things into account, 
who can doubt for a single moment what is our 
duty, and whether we should not give our assent 
now.' True, we are made the tribunal which is 
to judge of tlie time. In the exercise of that power 
we are to deal justly, and with the population 
now in California, and with its rapid increase, we 
are bound by the highest consideration to admit 
California. To my mmd, there can be no reason- 
able doubt. It is certainly no more than fair to 
admit that, when California has a population as 
large as she now has, we should admit her at 
once and without delay. 

Taking the history of the Government, the 
manner in which States have been admitted, the 
character of the country, its population, its homo- 
geneous character, our obligations to admit them, 
the right which the people of the country had to 
act, the manner in which they did act, it seems to 
me there cannot rest upon the mind of any indi- 
vidual a doubt that we should admit this State. 
And the question, the only question, under the 
view which I take of this matter is, " Is the con- 
stitution which she has presented to us republican 
in its form?" That, sir, it appears to me, is the 
simple question which we are to determine- Such, 
I believe, is the constitution of California. She 
has created it in pursuance of her rights. It is, to 
all intents and purposes, a State, so far as her ac- 
tion is concerned-, it is a State, and it will be a 
State of this Union, when we shall have admitted 
it within our limits, and when we shall have passed 
the necessary laws to make it so, as loe ivill. 

The simple, plain question then is, "Is the con- 
stitution presented here republican in its charac- 
ter .'" I have heard no exception toil. I have 
heard no Senator interpose that objection; and 
from a careful examination of all its features, no 
man can come to any other conclusion than that 
it is republican, and that it has within it many fea- 
tures which challenge our admiration. It has 
many features which might well excite admira- 
tion, and induce older and other Slates to follow 
its example. 

She has, first and foremost, already provided for 
the education of her children; and there is nothing 



that serves so much to elevate the character of a 
people, and promote the best interests of a State, 
as general education. Wherever education is pro- 
moted, and the character of the people is elevated, 
we have long since learned that the duties and ser- 
vices of the recruiting sergeant will be much less 
required. She has secured ihe right of suffrage to 
every freeman. She has prohibited slavtry within 
her limits Other States of the South have guar- 
antied it. There are a variety of other features in 
the provisions of her constitution well worthy of 
commendation and imitation. 

There is one other point which Senators should 
not lose sight of. She must come in, if she comes 
in at all, with her present limits — her present boun- 
daries. Any change in her boundaries will remand 
that State back to her former condition. The provi- 
sions of her constitution are such that, if changed, 
all that she has done in the election of her repre- 
sentatives, the formation of lier constitution, the 
creation of her governmeiU, must fall, and she go 
back again to her natural rights — again to prepare 
another constitution, which shall conform to the 
svill or wishes of Congress, if this does not. We 
are not, then, to lose sight of the fact, that any 
change, however slight, in relation to the bounda- 
ries of this territory, is a rejeclion. We may as 
well reject her in terms as to reject her indirectly. 
We may as well refuse to admit her at all as thus 
to refuse to recognize her boundaries, and thus to 
reject her indirectly. It cannot, it seems to me, 
remain doubtful as to what is our duty to those 
whom we represent, as well as to the people of 
California. We should admit her, and admit her 
at the earliest day possible; and the earlier the day 
the better, not only for her, but for the whole 
country. 

There have been various reproaches cast on the 
people of these territories. A sufficient answer to 
all this might be found in the character of tlie Sen- 
ators and__Representatives which she has sent here, 
and who are worthy and true representatives of that 
peojile. Any State might well be proud of such 
a delegation. Yet the people have been denomi- 
nated squatters and vagabonds, and almost every 
opprobrious ejiithet has been cast upon them. But 
who are they who have gone to that land, and are 
thus vilified? Why, this constitution which thejr 
have presented here is the evidence of iheir handi- 
work; it is an evidence of the character of the peo- 
ple; and I may say, from what I know of that peo- 
ple, that they may challenge a comparison with the 
constituents of any Senator on this floor. They are 
intelligent, worthy men, who have gone there to 
build up a Republic, and to make it one of the marts 
of commerce, which shall connect us with the far- 
distant East. They have gone there to adorn that 
land, and make it bud and blossom as the rose. 
They have gone there and asserted their rights as 
citizens of our country, and have come here ask- 
ing us to admit them into this Union as one of its 
sovereign States. That, sir, is the question for 
our decision. Judging from indications which 
cannot well be mistaken — judging from the indica- 
tions which are all around us — 1 have no doubt 
that she is to be welcomed into this Union, and 
the State of California is to be known as one of 
our sisters, and her star is to stud with other stars 
our national flag. 



W46 












V 



** 



4? ^<v 

















y^ 



> .'V 









,0^ 



.K£r';s 



o_ :^w^,* ,^0 










o * - 








-v^^' 



.'^.'''^.r.. 



ww^ 



'^v^O** 




O. 









V-^"* 






'7' 



•^C 









u 



I 

i 
I 



